anonemouse

She's already answered you.

Well, they'd be wrong. Christianity is your religion. Evangelical Christianity is your denomination. Just like Islam and Hindu are religions. There are different sects (denominations, if you want to call them that) of those religions, but they are all classified as Hindu or Islam. A Christian is a Christian, regardless of which denomination said Christian belongs to. So, yeah, you and Carlene definitely don't belong to the same denomination. But you DO belong to the same religion.

You look like you're doing wonderfully! You've lost nearly 85 pounds!

Obviously, there are differences in dogma between the different denominations of Christianity, but they are all sects of Christianity. Therefore, they are the same religion.

Actually, you did imply it. By saying that you are not of the same religion as a Catholic, you are saying that either you are not a Christian or that a Catholic is not a Christian. And I'm pretty sure that you describe yourself as a Christian. You are not the same denomination as Nathanson, but you are a member of the same religion.

A Christian is a Christian is a Christian. A Catholic is a Christian. A Lutheran is a Christian. A Methodist is a Christian. An Anglican is a Christian. A Southern Baptist is a Christian. A Freewill Baptist is a Christian. (I could list all the different sects and denominations for you, but you get the point.) All Christians, all part of the same religion.

Actually, his religion IS yours. A Catholic is a Christian, too. Different denomination, same religion.

I'm really hoping you don't understand how offensive that statement is. Otherwise, I'm incredibly disappointed in you. I thought you were a decent person to know and debate with.

I am SO sorry! I really don't know what to say, but just know that we are all supporting you here! Maybe we can help you get your mind off of the food.

Well, since I'm an Atheist, you probably would understand my stance on that. I think NATURE makes mistakes all the time. (Well, nature isn't sentient, so techically can't make mistakes, but you understand.) Fortunately, in some cases, those mistakes can be corrected by us.

Let me put my beliefs this way: My dad is a veterinarian. I've watched and assisted with many cesareans of animals that couldn't give birth on their own. I think anyone that would kill newborn animals is a disgusting human being. They're helpless, and yes, at that point, they are living, breathing creatures. I have also watched and assisted my dad with many spayings of already pregnant animals. It does not bother me to watch him dispose of those fetal kittens or puppies. Why? Because they are not able to live outside their mother. They are not individuals, at that point. I really, honestly see abortion in the same light. Until that fetus can live outside the mother, it isn't an individual.

No, I haven't. It wouldn't budge my beliefs, though, I can tell you that. Yes, a fetus has the potential to become a lovable (to some) little baby. Until it can live outside its living incubator, though, it isn't.

I should also add that in the above scenario, my cousin's family believes in spanking.

I should also add that I think that consistency is the key to any discipline. Take my cousin's brat for example. (I call him a brat because he's a holy terror. Believe me, if you saw him, you'd call him a brat, too.) They (his parents and grandparents) tell him that he can't do something and punish him if he does it. The next time he does it, though, he is either allowed to do it or gets away with no punishment. Even a non-parent can see that is the reason the kid's a brat. They aren't at all consistent in their method of punishment. Inconsistency = badly-behaved children.

Since I assume that I am the member that TracyK is referring to, I'll chime in here. I believe abortion is acceptable because I don't believe a fetus is a child until it reaches reliable viability. Since a fetus is not a child, abortion isn't child abuse. And again, I don't necessarily think spanking is child abuse. Spanking, IMO, is fine. But there is a limit, beyond which spanking becomes abuse. I don't think someone has to be a parent to see that. Sure, I can't tell someone what labor is like, but I can see and hear methods of child rearing that work or don't work. All badly-behaved children are not the products of households that refuse to spank. Believe me, from my own experience as a child, I saw lots of badly-behaved children that came from households that didn't exactly spare the rod. But again, I don't necessarily think that spanking is an inappropriate method of discipline. I do think it should be used as a last resort, after all other methods have been tried and rejected, though, and I do think that there should be strict limits on when and how it is applied.

I've actually never read The Grapes of Wrath. Embarassing, I know. The Pearl was my favorite Steinbeck novel.

Put NetNanny on it or some other type of parental monitoring system. If he's going to act like a teenager by sneaking around and looking at porn on other people's computers, treat him like one.

Ditto, Carlene. I was the only fifth grader I knew reading John Steinbeck. Unfortunately, once I started college, I started reading more for entertainment than for mental stimulation, since I was having to read so much scientific literature in my classes. I am currently in to paranormal and modern romances. Authors like Jennifer Crusie, Susan Sizemore, Sherrilyn Kenyon, etc.

That may be so, but you are ignoring the fact that it is not that way NOW. Right now, WE don't have to prove anything. The onus is on YOU. Just like in a criminal court case, the defendant doesn't have to prove that he or she is innocent. They are assumed innnocent until proven guilty by the prosecution. The onus is on the prosecution to prove their case. Right now, there is no consensus on exactly when human life begins. In order for you to essentially convict (for lack of a better term) someone of killing another human being when they are having an abortion, you have to prove that it was a human being.

I looked it up, but I don't think it was a bartholin's cyst. It was further up on my vulva, and I didn't have a lump or anything before this abcess came up. It's worse than it looks, believe me. That shot was the most excruciating medical procedure that I've ever gone through. And that includes the time I had a very large (larger than a quarter) cystic acne abcess on my face lanced and the doctor didn't let the anesthetic spray kick in before he cut it and started pressing. That was agonizing, but this was way beyond it.

Oh, it does, doesn't it? It's wonderful. I love RnR. It really was what drew me to LBT. I mean, otherwise, support sites are basically a dime a dozen. RnR is what makes LBT special. And it really is helpful to the members, IMO. As long as I am absorbed in a thread here, I'm not craving food or binging.

I just got an email from my surgeon's office manager. She said that they were moving my appointment with the surgeon up to June 13th and that they had scheduled my surgery for July 3rd! I am completely thrilled! My appointment with the surgeon was scheduled for June 27th and I hadn't even gotten a surgery date yet. I thought it was going to be sometime in late July. I can't believe this!

It really would. And it would be embarassing, too! You know, telling people when they ask why it was postponed that it was because I had an infected ingrown hair down there.

That's one of my basic objections to having an extremely large family (I'm talking 7+ kids, generally). I don't really have objections to someone having as many kids as they want as long as they can afford to take care of them and can give them the time and attention that each child needs. But that's the kicker. Like my mom always warned me, babies are expensive. To me, it would be very difficult to afford a whole lot of kids on the average couple's salary. And honestly, people who make higher than average salaries generally put lots of time and effort into making that salary. So, even if they had the money for a dozen kids, would most of them really have the time to devote to them? Factor in that either one parent would be staying home to care for all of them or that the kids would all have to be shipped off to a day-time care-giver, and they would either be surviving on one income or facing massive bills for daycare.

Well, where I'm from, abortion isn't murder. Therefore, women who have abortions aren't murderers.